|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
16 Feb 2011 : Column 798Wcontinued
Anne Marie Morris: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport what recent estimate he has made of the number of households in Devon with a broadband connection speed of less than 2mbps. 
Mr Vaizey: The Digital Britain report (June 2009) reported that 12-15% of the telephone lines in Devon were unsuitable for broadband at 2Mbps.
Broadband Delivery UK is assessing current broadband provision at community level across the UK in its work to deliver the coalition Government's objective to facilitate universal broadband access of at least 2Mbps and achieve the best superfast broadband network in Europe by 2015.
Ian Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport what areas of North Wales are included in the pilot area for superfast broadband announced on 10 February 2011. 
Mr Vaizey [holding answer 15 February 2011]: The funding announced by the Chancellor will help bring superfast broadband to hard-to-reach areas and extend superfast broadband to Pwllheli and the surrounding areas of North Wales.
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport how much his Department spent on carbon offsetting in each of the last three years; and to which companies payments for carbon offsetting were made in each such year. 
John Penrose: The Department has spent the following amounts on carbon offsetting over the last three years.
|Companies to whom payment m ade||Amount (£)|
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport what definition of the term economically sterile traffic his Department uses; and what plans his Department has to remove such traffic from networks. 
Mr Vaizey: The Department does not have a standard definition of the term "economically sterile traffic", and does not have a policy dedicated to removing such traffic from networks.
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport what estimate he has made of the cost to Ofcom of implementation of sections 3 to 16 of the Digital Economy Act 2010; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Vaizey: Ofcom is expected to incur one-off costs of £5.8 million, and ongoing costs of £5 million per annum as a result of its responsibilities under the Digital Economy Act. These responsibilities include monitoring and enforcement activities, devising a code of practice, and the establishment of an appeals mechanism.
These estimates can be found in the impact assessment which accompanied the draft statutory instrument on cost-sharing for the initial obligations under the Digital Economy Act.
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport for what reasons his Department has decided to impose 25 per cent. loss of costs for implementation of sections 3 to 16 of the Digital Economy Act 2010 on internet service providers. 
Mr Vaizey: Placing part of the costs for the implementation of the initial obligations under the Digital Economy Act on internet service providers means that they have a real incentive to adopt efficient and effective systems for issuing notifications and producing copyright infringement lists.
This apportionment of costs was consulted upon in 2010. The consultation document, along with the individual responses and Government response can be found at
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport what estimate he has made of the effects on consumer demand for internet broadband of implementation of sections 3 to 16 of the Digital Economy Act 2010. 
Mr Vaizey: The impact assessment which accompanied the Digital Economy Act contains this information. Assuming that internet service providers fully pass down to consumers the annual costs incurred by complying with the initial obligations of the Digital Economy Act, it is estimated that the increased cost to consumers would have a relatively small but permanent effect of reducing demand for broadband connection by between 10,000-40,000.
Background information and supporting evidence for this estimate can be found at
Tom Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport what steps he plans to take in respect of implementation of the EU Electronic Communications Framework. 
Mr Vaizey: DCMS is currently implementing revisions to the EU Electronic Communications Framework. The deadline for implementation is 25th May 2011.
Following a public consultation which ran between September and December last year officials are currently analysing responses.
We will publish the responses to that consultation and revised impact assessments In March and lay the statutory instruments that will enable legislative change in April.
Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport what assessment he has made of the trends in long-term participation rates in each region for (a) football, (b) cricket, (c) rugby, (d) volleyball, (e) netball, (f) swimming and (g) hockey by age and sex. 
Hugh Robertson: The detail on participation in these sports is contained in the surveys I referred to in my reply to the hon. Member on 7 February 2011, Official Report, column 11W. In addition, I understand that Sport England has already contacted the hon. Member to offer their help in providing any further specific pieces of information that he would like. I will, of course, answer any questions that he may have in this House, but hope that the Sport England contact will also prove helpful.
Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport pursuant to the answer of 7 February 2011, Official Report, column 12W, on sport: finance, what proportion of the grant-in-aid received by Sport England in each year from 2000-01 to 2009-10 was spent in each region; and what estimate he has made of the proportion of such grant in aid funding that will be spent in each region in each year from 2010-11 to 2015-16. 
Hugh Robertson: A regional breakdown of grant in aid received by Sport England is not held and to commission this information would exceed the disproportionate cost limit.
Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport what estimate he has made of the number of children with a television in their bedroom. 
Mr Vaizey: The Secretary of State has made no estimate.
Simon Kirby: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent steps he has taken to ensure the safety and security of blood supplies to members of the armed forces; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Robathan: All the blood components received from NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) are provided under a service level agreement, and as such, the blood supplied to members of the armed forces will be as safe as that given to any other NHS patient. We are not aware of any new recent steps that have been taken with regards to blood safety.
Simon Kirby: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many soldiers received a blood transfusion as part of their medical care in the last 12 months for which figures are available. 
Mr Robathan: Members of the armed forces receive treatment in a number of NHS hospitals in the UK, as well as in hospitals abroad. This information is not held centrally and it would be impossible to establish how many people have received a blood transfusion as part of their medical care, without interrogating individuals' medical records. This would entail gaining permission to access medically confidential information on an individual basis and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
Simon Kirby: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what consideration he has given to the use of pathogen reduction technology in healthcare provision for armed forces personnel; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Robathan: In common with all new medical techniques and technologies, the Defence Medical Services will consider the merits of pathogen reduction technology as appropriate. New technology will be subject to national best practice and guidance, and only introduced once licensed and demonstrated to be safe and effective. The Advisory Group on military medicine will advise the surgeon general on the safety and efficacy of new approaches to patient management.
Simon Kirby: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether (a) the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine and (b) the Ministry of Defence Hospital Units have considered the use of pathogen reduction technology for use on blood products; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Robathan: The Royal Centre for Defence Medicine and the Ministry of Defence Hospital Units are essentially administrative units for the management of Defence Medical Services (DMS) personnel who work within the host NHS Trusts and are not responsible for the delivery of clinical care. The care given at each of these sites, including consideration of pathogen reduction technology, is delivered in accordance with the clinical policies, guidelines and governance of the relevant NHS Trust.
Simon Kirby: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether staff at the Defence Medical Services establishment have carried out any studies into the use of pathogen reduction technology for use on blood products to treat wounded armed services personnel; and what representations he has received on this issue. 
Mr Robathan: On the basis of the work conducted in 2009 by the Advisory Committee on the Safety of Blood, Tissues and Organs (SaBTO, a UK independent non-departmental public body run by the Department of Health) into the reduction of risk of bacterial contamination of platelets, the Defence Medical Services have not conducted any studies into the use of pathogen reduction technology on blood products for the treatment of injured service personnel.
Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on what date long-lead items for the Astute-class submarines, including reactors, have been purchased or ordered to date. 
Dr Fox: The requirement for, and timing of, ordering long lead items varies between submarine class.
The dates that orders were placed for long lead items including reactors for the Astute Class submarines are shown in the following table:
|Long lead items||Dates ordered|
Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what estimate he has made of the value of each industrial participation contract involving foreign firms in each of the last 25 years; 
(2) if he will estimate the value of industrial participation by foreign firms in each region of the UK in each of the last 25 years; 
Peter Luff: The Ministry of Defence (MOD) does not have industrial participation (IP) contracts. It is the MOD's policy to invite IP proposals from foreign bidders when they are bidding for MOD contracts. However, IP proposals are not considered as part of the evaluation of a tender, either at selection or award. Individual cases of IP within contracts are not readily available, could only be given at disproportionate cost and would be commercially sensitive. However, since 1987 the cumulative value of IP arrangements is around £10 billion. This can be broken down as follows:
|Value (£ million)|
Bridget Phillipson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much his Department spent on travel in each month since April 2010. 
Mr Robathan [holding answer 10 January 2011]: Ministry of Defence monthly expenditure on travel since April 2010 has been as follows:
|Expenditure (£ million)|
These figures include, for both service and civilian staff, the cost of travel and accommodation booked centrally, the reimbursement of expenses incurred when using their own vehicle for duty journeys, most rail fares not booked centrally and some car hire costs. The figures also include expenses reimbursed to civilian staff for overnight accommodation, subsistence, taxi, bus and underground fares, parking charges and road tolls, and most of their air fares not booked centrally. Costs of the MOD's white fleet are not included as they are not recorded on a monthly basis; however, we estimate that white fleet contract and fuel costs averaged just under £4 million a month between April and September 2010. The figures also do not include all travel and subsistence costs reimbursed to service personnel, but we are currently improving the accessibility of these in the interests of transparency.
By whatever means staff travel, they must do so in a way that is the most economical in both money and official time.
I apologise for the delay in answering this question.
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the reply to the hon. Member for East Lothian of 13 January 2011, Official Report, columns 747-48W, on ex-servicemen: radiation exposure, on what basis the independent contractor was selected; what the name of the contractor is; what the monetary value of the contract is; on what date the report on health audit is due for delivery; and whether the contract was advertised for competitive tender. 
Mr Robathan: Following informal contacts and meetings with a number of academic departments in 2009 and discussions with a range of stakeholders, including the British Nuclear Test Veterans Association, the Ministry of Defence (MOD) identified an option to conduct an independent health needs audit in February 2010.
The MOD statement of requirement detailed the need for external assistance to provide an assessment of the health needs of British nuclear test veterans and in particular to look at:
their experience and impact of major or significant illness;
their experiences of NHS and social care services, including access to, and availability of services and the service itself;
common issues and themes from veterans' experiences, outcomes and recommendations to improve health and care services for nuclear test veterans.
Stakeholders expressed a strong desire to undertake a study quickly. Oxford Healthcare Associates (now known as Miles and Green Associates) were identified as having the relevant levels of expertise and experience to undertake a study of this nature.
Following a business case setting out procurement options, the intention to place a single source contract was advertised in the Defence Contracts Bulletin in 16 July 2010 and the contract was formally let on 26 August 2010.
The value of the contract is £75,000 excluding VAT. Miles and Green are due to present their findings in the summer.
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the cost to his Department was of overnight accommodation in (a) April 2010 and (b) each subsequent month. 
Mr Robathan [holding answer 20 December 2010]: Ministry of Defence expenditure on overnight accommodation since April 2010 has been as follows:
|Expenditure (£ million)|
These figures include accommodation costs paid centrally for both service and civilian staff and subsistence costs reimbursed to civilian staff for hotel and mess accommodation and for staying with family or friends for the purpose of undertaking official duty commitments. The figures do not include travel and subsistence costs reimbursed to service personnel but we are currently improving the accessibility of these in the interests of transparency.
I apologise for the delay in answering this question.
Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what type of reactor his Department plans to order for the Trident replacement submarines. 
Dr Fox: It is planned that the Vanguard replacement submarine will be powered by a pressurised water reactor, as was the case with previous classes. The precise configuration of the reactor is under consideration as part of the Initial Gate decision.
Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether steel for the substantial construction of the hull structure of the first boat of the Trident replacement programme will be made as a long-lead purchase prior to main gate. 
Dr Fox: Yes. The specialist high strength steel needed for the hull structure for the first boat is included as a long-lead item in the Initial Gate Business Case for the programme. This is due to the length of time needed for the mill run, that means that the order must be placed prior to Main Gate in order not to put at risk the in-service date.
Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence from which work streams the £750 million of savings to the public purse arising from the Trident replacement programme identified in the Strategic Defence and Security Review will be made. 
Dr Fox: The Strategic Defence and Security Review identified a total of £1.2 billion of savings and £2 billion of deferrals over the next 10 years. These savings are attributable to submarine production, the nuclear warhead, supporting infrastructure and improved efficiency at the Atomic Weapons Establishment.
Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence by what date he expects it will be necessary to reach a decision on the replacement or refurbishing of the UK nuclear warhead. 
Dr Fox: As the Prime Minister informed the House on 19 October 2010, Official Report, columns 797-826, the strategic defence and security review announced the deferral of the decision to replace or refurbish the UK nuclear warhead until the next Parliament.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what contracts his Department has agreed for work on the Trident replacement concept phase to
date; and with which companies such contracts have been agreed. 
Dr Fox: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by the Minister for Defence Equipment, Support and Technology, my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Worcestershire (Peter Luff), on 29 November 2010, Official Report, column 579W, to the hon. Member for Cambridge (Dr Huppert).
Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much his Department has allocated to spend on the Trident replacement programme in each year between 2010-11 and 2015-16. 
Dr Fox: Approximately £330 million was allocated to the programme to replace the Vanguard submarine for the financial year 2010-11. This includes expenditure on the Common Missile Compartment and on nuclear propulsion. The Initial Gate Business Case for the assessment phase of the programme to replace the Trident submarines is currently being reviewed.
However, we do not routinely publish figures for anticipated annual project expenditure, as to do so would prejudice commercial interests. Moreover, in line with standard procedures, the programme will be subject to the normal Ministry of Defence annual planning round process.
Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he plans to seek Parliamentary approval for long-lead orders prior to the Trident replacement main gate decision. 
Dr Fox: I have no such plans. It is not normal practice to seek parliamentary approval for such matters. The Initial Gate approval is subject to the normal Ministry of Defence and Treasury process for category A programmes.
Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) whether he had discussions with his US counterpart prior to the sharing of information with the Russian Federation on UK-designated Trident D5 missiles; 
(2) whether he has made an assessment of the potential effects of the sharing of information between the US and Russia on UK-designated Trident D5 missiles on the operational status of the UK's Trident nuclear weapon system. 
Dr Fox: Officials from the Ministry of Defence have regular discussions with US authorities on a range of Defence issues. Where discussions relate to the D5 Trident missiles they take place mainly under the auspices of the 1963 Polaris Sales Agreement (as amended for Trident).
The US holds a stockpile of Trident D5 missiles from which the UK has purchased title to a number but these are unspecified in the stockpile. There are therefore no UK-designated missiles.
Under the terms of the bilateral new strategic arms reduction treaty (New START) limited information is shared between the US and Russia. Procedures for
transferring information have been in place since the 1991 START treaty and have been carried forward and updated for New START. Such information exchange between the US and Russia will have no detrimental effect on the operational status of the independent UK deterrent.
Rosie Cooper: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the cost to his Department is of meeting its contractual obligations to Atos Origin in each year of that contract. 
Chris Grayling: The total cost of the DWP Medical Services contract with Atos Healthcare, a division of Atos Origin, is in the region of £100 million per annum. This estimate covers the total number of examinations undertaken across all benefits and also includes relating to written and verbal medical advice, fixed overheads, administrative costs, investment in new technology and other service improvements.
Since the commencement of the current contract, the spend with Atos Healthcare is shown in the following table.
The cost incurred in 2010-11 to 30 November 2010 was £69.6 million.
Richard Fuller: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what plans he has to extend recognition of shared care parenting in the arrangement for the payment of child maintenance. 
Maria Miller: The Government have recently published a consultation document-"Strengthening families, promoting parental responsibility: the future of child maintenance";
The Government want to encourage parents to reach family-based arrangements for child maintenance which will facilitate co-parenting and ongoing involvement of both parents in their children's lives. If parents can come to an agreement about shared care we would hope that they could also make a family-based arrangement suitable to both parties.
The Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission (the Commission) is currently reviewing shared care arrangements as it develops plans to move to the new child maintenance system in 2012.
Mr McFadden: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much his Department has spent on furniture since May 2010. 
Chris Grayling: Since May 2010 the Department spent a total of £3.6 million on furniture; £3.3 million of which was supplied for a programme of works across the Jobcentre Plus network in response to the economic downturn.
The Department signed a 20 year PFI contract with Telereal Trillium in 1998 for the provision of fully fitted and serviced accommodation for which the Department pays an all inclusive unitary charge. The £3.6 million was for furniture not included within the contract price.
The total spend on furniture in 2009-10 was £8 million of which £7.4 million was in response to the economic downturn. The figure is net of a £3.5 million discount, which was negotiated with Telereal Trillium in delivering the programme of works in response to the economic downturn.
The scope of the services provided by Telereal Trillium include the provision of all accommodation in over 1,000 buildings and services, which includes building maintenance, life cycle works, energy/utilities management and environment, internal reorganisation, porterage, security, health and safety, furniture and equipment, catering/security facilities and equipment, catering, waste management, internal and external cleaning, room booking service, and landscape maintenance.
All the figures include the costs of moving and installing furniture and other items, such as electrical and white goods. These costs can be disaggregated only at disproportionate cost.
Jenny Willott: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) what assessment has been made of the risks to human health and safety from the use of products containing dichloromethane for (a) industrial or manufacturing purposes and (b) non-industrial and domestic purposes; and if he will make a statement; 
(2) whether his Department is considering the merits of seeking a derogation from EU restrictions on the use of the chemical dichloromethane; and if he will make a statement. 
Chris Grayling: Dichloromethane is a widely-used solvent, which can have narcotic effects at high concentrations.
Between 1989 and 2007, 18 deaths and 56 non-fatal injuries relating to use of paint strippers containing this solvent were registered across Europe. There is now an EU-wide ban under the REACH regulation on the placing on the market of paint strippers containing this substance for consumers or untrained professionals which came into effect from 6 December 2010.
In the UK the rate of injury from the use of these paint strippers is very low. The history of accidents involving this substance shows only five fatal accidents in 18 years, and an average of just over one other injury a year. Recognising that these paint strippers can be
used safely, and their importance for UK businesses, the Government intend to take advantage of a derogation permitted in the ban to allow for the continued sale and use of these paint strippers for trained professionals.
Nicky Morgan: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will assess the merits of extending the higher rate disability living allowance component to people in employment aged 65 and over. 
Maria Miller: The Government have no plans to extend the higher rate mobility component of disability living allowance to people in employment aged 65 and over.
It is normal for pension and benefit schemes to contain different provisions for people at different stages of their lives. Disability living allowance and its proposed replacement-personal independence payment-are intended to help people who have the financial disadvantage of being disabled early, or relatively early, in life and have had less opportunity to work, earn and save.
There is a wide range of support available to disabled people over the age of 65 including state pension, pension credit and attendance allowance. In addition, Access to Work scheme is also available to those aged 65 and over and can pay towards the equipment needed at work, adapting premises to meet needs, a support worker, and it can also pay towards the cost of getting to work for people who cannot use public transport.
Jake Berry: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many residents of Rossendale and Darwen constituency receive disability living allowance; and what the cost to the public purse was of such payments in the last 12 months. 
Maria Miller: The latest available 12 months is the 2009-10 financial year. This information is shown in the following table.
|Great Britain, 2009/10-Rossendale and Darwen|
DWP statistical and accounting data
Parliamentary constituency expenditure data can be found at the following URL:
Further benefit expenditure data can be found at the following URL:
Dame Anne Begg: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what estimate he has made of the number of people with cancer who are eligible for disability living allowance who will be ineligible for the personal independence payment. 
Maria Miller: We are currently consulting on the reform of disability living allowance with the key proposal of a new benefit, to be known as personal independence payment, which will be introduced from 2013. The Department has made no such estimate because disability living allowance and its successor are designed to recognise the extra costs associated with disability and are not based on diagnoses or condition.
Mr Betts: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) what measures he is taking to increase the rate of employment of refugees; 
(2) what steps he is taking to ensure that the Work programme's prime contractors in each lot provide appropriate support to refugee customers; 
(3) what steps he is taking to ensure that refugees on active benefits receive appropriate pre-employment support; 
(4) whether he has assessed the effect on the employment prospects of refugee customers of excluding refugees from the categories of customer eligible for early access onto the Work programme at the discretion of Jobcentre Plus; 
(5) for what reason refugees are not included in the categories of customer eligible for early access onto the Work programme at the discretion of Jobcentre Plus listed in the invitation to tender for the Work programme; 
(6) what the employment outcomes were for refugee customers who gained early access onto Flexible New Deal and New Deal programmes in 2008 and 2009; 
(7) how many refugee customers gained early access onto Flexible New Deal and New Deal programmes between 2008 and 2010; 
(8) what consideration he gave to continuing the eligibility of refugee customers for early access when the Work programme starts. 
Chris Grayling: The Government are radically reforming the welfare to work system to provide an integrated programme of personalised help for people who are out of work. The support package includes enhancement of the provision offered by Jobcentre Plus, an improved skills offer through the Get Britain Working measures and tailored support via the Work programme. This flexible system will offer the right support at the right time to all people on benefits, including refugees.
For the majority of refugees the flexible, personalised services that Jobcentre Plus will offer, alongside the Get Britain Working measures, will meet their needs.
For those with significant disadvantages, early entry to the Work programme may be appropriate. Advisers will have the discretion to refer more vulnerable customers to the Work programme where it is clear that they would benefit from the type of assistance provided.
The term refugee covers a broad spectrum of individuals with a wide range of differing needs. I therefore do not believe it would be appropriate to refer all refugees to the Work programme more quickly than other people receiving benefit.
We have asked bidders for the Work programme contracts, without being prescriptive, to develop innovative models of support. These must be designed to be flexible and specifically tailored to meet the needs of individual customers and the local area. As part of the evaluation of process, the Department will consider bidders' ability to meet the diverse needs of different customers and customer groups.
I am unable to provide the statistical information requested in relation to the position of refugees under previous programmes such as New Deal and Flexible New Deal. This information was not systematically collected at the time and cannot be obtained retrospectively.
Glenda Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to the contribution of the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State of 24 January 2011, Official Report, House of Lords, column 778, on the Housing Benefit (Amendment) Regulations 2010, when he expects to commission the independent review into housing benefit; whom he expects to undertake the review; what method he plans to use to identify the review team; when he expects the review to report; and if he will make a statement. 
Steve Webb: The Department is in the process of a procurement exercise with leading research organisations for the evaluation and working on the final specification of the project.
We will work to the Government Social Research Code to commission a team of independent, external researchers who will undertake the review and fieldwork elements of the project by early April.
The Department anticipates emerging findings of the implementation of the new measures will be available by the spring of 2012. Interim findings will be available by the summer of 2012. Draft final findings will be available by the winter of 2012-13.
Glenda Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many private rented homes in the (a) City of London, (b) London borough of Camden and (c) London borough of Brent he estimates will be affordable to housing benefit recipients following the implementation of his reforms to housing benefit. 
Steve Webb: The number of affordable properties will depend upon the total number of properties available to rent in each area, for which forecasts are not available, and the rent-setting decisions of landlords.
Mr Crausby: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what assessment he has made of the effects of reductions in funding to the Health and Safety Executive on the effective operation of the Reporting of Injuries, Disease and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995. 
Chris Grayling: There have been no changes to the operation of the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR) as a result of the spending review.
The proposed change, about which HSE is currently consulting, was recommended in the report by Lord Young, "Common Sense, Common Safety". This report seeks to focus regulations where they are needed most to create a new system that is proportionate and not bureaucratic. Actions to implement the recommendations are being taken forward across Government in line with the timetable set out in his report.
Incidents reported under the regulations are selected for investigation using HSE's published RIDDOR incident selection criteria. There has been no change to these criteria although HSE is considering the modalities for notification.
Enforcement action in the event of an employer or other duty holder failing to report a death, injury, dangerous occurrence or case of an occupational disease is taken in accordance with its enforcement policy statement (EPS). Again there has been no change to this.
Mr Crausby: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what consultation he has undertaken on changes to the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995. 
Chris Grayling: A formal, statutory consultation was launched by HSE on 31 January 2011 seeking views on the proposed amendment to regulation 3(2) of the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR). The consultation closes on 9 May 2011. A copy of the consultation document can be viewed at
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when he next plans to visit the jobcentre which serves Thirsk, Malton and Filey constituency; and if he will make a statement. 
Chris Grayling: Since May 2010, the Department's ministerial team has visited numerous constituencies and jobcentres across the UK.
The Department's ministerial team currently have no plans to visit the Thirsk Malton and Filey constituency, however, should any Ministers do so, they will look to visit the jobcentre there.
Stephen Lloyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what consideration he has given to the merits of introducing an increased earnings disregard for lone parents prior to implementation of other aspects of his universal credit proposals. 
Chris Grayling: The increased earnings disregards are an intrinsic part of the new universal credit and designed, alongside a single taper, to improve the incentives to enter work.
Until the universal credit is introduced lone parents will greatly benefit from the comprehensive, personalised support provided by Jobcentre Plus and the new Work programme which will provide a flexible, personalised approach to helping people back into work, and will aim to continue supporting people after they have entered work.
Jessica Morden: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will estimate the number of women in Newport East constituency who will be affected by the change in timetable for the equalisation of the state pension age. 
Steve Webb: This information is not available.
On the basis of the mid-2009 ONS population estimates, we estimate that around 1,500 women in the Newport local authority area could be affected by the change in the equalisation of the state pension age.
Stephen Lloyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what discussions he has had with service users to inform the development of universal credit proposals; and to what extent those proposals take into account the needs of low-income families. 
Chris Grayling: The Department is committed to involving customers at every stage of the design and delivery of universal credit. We have an ongoing programme of customer insight work and have already held a number of focus groups with a broad range of benefit and tax credit customers (who will be the service users of universal credit), including low-income families.
The ongoing programme of user-centred design activity, which is being conducted jointly with customers, means that the Department will continue to ensure that the delivery of universal credit is designed around specific customer needs.
The research findings have not been published, as the analysis is not yet complete. They are also covered by the policy advice exemption from publication.
Stephen Mosley: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many Social Fund (a) budgeting loans, (b) crisis loans and (c) community care grants for the purpose of buying television sets over the value of (i) £500 and (ii) £1,000 there were in (A) City of Chester constituency and (B) the UK in each of the last five years. 
Steve Webb: Firstly, part of the question refers to figures for the whole of the UK-information regarding the discretionary social fund for Northern Ireland is a matter for the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, my right hon. Friend the Member for North Shropshire (Mr Paterson).
In the case of budgeting loans, applicants are asked to tick which of seven categories they need help for, but are not asked to specify the items they require. Television
sets would come under the category 'to buy furniture or household equipment'. Data are not available on the number of awards for each category.
The number of crisis loans or community care grants initially awarded for the purpose of buying television sets over the value of (i) £500 or (ii) £1,000 in (A) City of Chester constituency or (B) Great Britain in each of the financial years 2005-06 to 2009-10 was extremely low, being recorded as nil or negligible.
1. The information provided is management information. Our preference is to answer all parliamentary questions using Official/National Statistics but in this case we only have management information available. It is not quality assured to the same extent as Official/National statistics and there are some issues with the data, for example, the information given does not include applications which were processed clerically and had not been entered on to the social fund computer system by the end of the relevant financial year.
2. Data are available for initial awards only. No information is available on the number of awards of the type described which were made after review.
3. Exact numbers have not been given for data protection reasons. 'Nil or negligible' means less than five.
Department for Work and Pensions Social Fund Policy, Budget and Management Information System.
Tessa Munt: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much was spent on each type of welfare and benefits payment to people with an income of (a) £6,475 to £7,475, (b) £7,476 to £8,475, (c) £8,476 to £9,475 and (d) £9,476 to £10,000 on each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement. 
Maria Miller: Information is not available for all welfare and benefits by income level. The following table shows the available data on expenditure on benefits in payment to people in households with gross unequivalised annual incomes within the bands requested. Estimates are derived from the Family Resources Survey and are based on a three year average to help take account of small sample sizes in certain income bands and statistical variation across the years. Use of survey data means that information is only available for the benefits shown.
|Table 1: Benefit expenditure (in millions) by unequivalised annual gross income band, United Kingdom, 2004-05 to 2006-07|
|Benefit||£6,476 to £7,475||£7,476 to £8,475||£8,476 to £9,475||£9,476 to £10,000||Total (three year average)|
|Table 2: Benefit expenditure (in millions) by unequivalised annual gross income band, United Kingdom, 2005-06 to 2007-08|
|Benefit||£6,476 to £7,475||£7,476 to £8,475||£8,476 to £9,475||£9,476 to £10,000||Total (three year average)|
|Table 3: Benefit expenditure (in millions) by unequivalised annual gross income band, United Kingdom, 2006-07 to 2008-09|
|Benefit||£6,476 to £7,475||£7,476 to £8,475||£8,476 to £9,475||£9,476 to £10,000||Total (three year average)|
1. Estimates are derived from the Family Resources Survey and are based on a three year average to help take account of small sample sizes in certain income bands and statistical variation across the years.
2. All amounts are in 2008-09 prices. Information covers Great Britain only.
3. Shares of benefit expenditure by income band according to the Family Resources Survey have been applied to administrative data to derive a split by income band. Administrative data totals are available to the nearest million pounds, while information based on survey data is presented rounded to the nearest £50 million.
4. The income measures used to derive the estimates shown employ the same methodology as the Department for Work and Pensions publication 'Households Below Average Income' series. Note, however, that unlike most incomes used in the 'Households Below Average Income' publication, incomes here are gross and unequivalised.
5. The Family Resources Survey is known to undercount receipt of certain benefits. This methodology assumes that this undercount is spread proportionally across income bands. For example, if 30% of expenditure is in a certain income band, this assumes 30% of any undercount is also in that income band. This assumption may not be justified here given the relationship between overall income and reporting of benefit income.
6. Unequivalised gross incomes have been rounded to the nearest pound sterling in order to assign all incomes to bands.
The relatively small proportion of benefit expenditure directed at the low income bands specified is mainly due to three reasons; firstly, there is a low proportion of the population overall with gross unequivalised annual incomes less than £10,000; secondly, a major factor causing very low incomes is non take-up of benefits and tax credits; and thirdly, evidence suggests that the Family Resources Survey has an undercount in terms of recording benefit receipt compared to administrative totals.
Simon Hart: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) how many and what proportion of claimants of employment and support allowance in Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire constituency have been found capable of work as a result of a work capability assessment since May 2005; 
(2) what proportion of residents of Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire constituency who appealed against work capability assessments were successful since May 2005; 
(3) how many appeals against the outcomes of work capability assessments were made in Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire constituency in each of the last five years; and how many such appeals were successful. 
Chris Grayling: Since the above questions all relate to the work capability assessment (WCA) for employment and support allowance (ESA) in the same geographical areas, a single response addressing all the questions is given as follows.
ESA was introduced in October 2008. Information on WCAs held, their outcomes and subsequent appeals is not available at the constituency level. Figures have therefore been provided for the Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire local authority (LA) areas, which cover the Carmarthen West and Pembrokeshire constituency.
The number of fit for work decisions given at initial WCA in Carmarthenshire LA between October 2008 and February 2010, the latest data available, is 1,540 or 42% of all new ESA claims received. In Pembrokeshire LA there were 680 fit for work decisions, representing 36% of all new ESA claims received in the same period.
Of claims received between October 2008 and August 2009 in Carmarthenshire, that were found fit for work at initial WCA, 430 have appealed the WCA decision and had their appeal heard by July 2010. Of these appeals 160 or 38% found in favour of the appellant. For Pembrokeshire, there have been 140 appeals, of which 20 or 15% found in favour of the appellant.
The above data are taken from benefit claims data held by the Department for Work and Pensions, functional assessment data sourced from Atos Healthcare and appeals data sourced from the Tribunals Service.
All case load figures have been rounded to the nearest 10 and percentages to the nearest percentage point.
Pauline Latham: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent steps his Department has taken to support post-conflict reconstruction in Burundi, with particular reference to providing livelihoods for returning reintegrated refugees. 
Alistair Burt: The UK has provided strong political and programmatic support to post-conflict reconstruction and the return of refugees in Burundi since the end of the civil war in 2003.
The Foreign and Commonwealth Office has worked closely with the international community to support Burundi in its return to stability. Through regular discussions in the UN Security Council, in particular around the regular renewal of the mandate of the UN mission in Burundi, and through active participation in the Peace Building Commission, the UK has promoted the protection of the human rights of vulnerable citizens, including returnees, and emphasised the importance of instituting an effective transitional justice mechanism. Our offices in Burundi and our ambassador based in Kigali have also encouraged the Government of Burundi to take the steps that we believe are essential in enabling Burundi to complete its post-conflict recovery. The Anglican Archbishop of Burundi recently praised the support of the British Government for their engagement.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what guidance his Department issues on flying the EU flag from (a) embassies, (b) high commissions and (c) other Government buildings overseas. 
Mr Lidington: The British flag has precedence. In all cases where it is deployed, the European flag is displayed alongside, not instead of, the British Diplomatic, Consular or (in Commonwealth countries) Union flag. Our Representation to the EU in Brussels displays the European flag at all times, as do all our EU partners on their buildings.
On Europe day (9 May), posts in EU and EU-applicant countries display the European flag. Other posts may also display the European flag on Europe day where this is normal local practice.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether the provisions of any EU treaty govern the flying of EU flags from Government buildings overseas; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Lidington: There is no specific legal base in either the treaty on European Union or the treaty on the functioning of the European Union which governs the flying of an EU flag from Government buildings overseas. The UK's representation to the EU in Brussels displays the European flag at all times, as do all our EU partners on their buildings. On Europe day (9 May), posts in EU and EU-applicant countries display the European flag. Other posts may also display the European flag on Europe day where this is normal local practice. In all cases, the European flag is displayed alongside, not instead of, the British Diplomatic, Consular or (in Commonwealth countries) Union flag, with the British flag having precedence.
Mr Douglas Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will place in the Library a copy of each unclassified item of briefing given to Ministers on the outcome of the 2010 parliamentary elections in Egypt. 
Mr Hague: Ministers received no briefing at unclassified level following the outcome of the 2010 parliamentary elections in Egypt.
During parliamentary elections in Egypt in November and December, domestic observers, civil society organisations and election participants raised serious concerns about arrangements in the run-up to and during the elections. These included refusal of access for international monitors, lack of access in many instances for independent national monitors and candidate representatives to key parts of the voting and counting process and reports of attempts to limit media comment on the elections. In a number of cases, reported voting irregularities and the harassment and arrest of opposition candidates and their supporters amounted to serious interference in the electoral process. This called into question the credibility of some of the results. The majority of the opposition parties and candidates refused to participate in the second round of elections, citing these issues. We strongly encouraged the Egyptian authorities to address those concerns. After the elections the UK and EU highlighted in public and in private irregularities in the electoral process including the absence of independent monitors and limits to press freedom.
The Government worked to support free and fair parliamentary elections in 2010. We called on the Egyptian Government to amend legislation to ensure full compatibility with Egypt's international obligations in this regard and to permit international observers to visit Egypt during the election periods.
The EU also supported a coalition of Egyptian civil society organisations to monitor the presidential and parliamentary elections. These non-governmental organisations are also working to raise Egyptian voter awareness towards their political rights, train observers to be able effectively to monitor the elections, and to improve media coverage of the electoral campaigns along internationally recognised professional and ethical standards. Our embassy is also supporting a number of smaller projects with Egyptian civil society to assist their capacity building for the electoral process.
Mr Douglas Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what contact his Department has had with representatives of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Hague: As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has made clear, we continue to press the Egyptian Government to give opposition groups a real role in the reform process, through a genuinely broad-based dialogue. The Egyptian Government has begun that Dialogue and as part of it, has met the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt who are an important part of Egypt's national political mosaic.
Our embassy in Cairo maintains working level contacts with many government and opposition figures, including the Muslim Brotherhood. We have been in contact with members of the Muslim Brotherhood in their positions as elected representatives in the Egyptian parliament. We will continue to have contacts with those members of the Muslim Brotherhood who are, or who are likely to be, part of the political dialogue process in Egypt and who have agreed to respect and work within that process.
John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what expenditure was incurred for hospitality for the British embassy or high commission in (a) Albania, (b) Macedonia, (c) Serbia, (d) Mozambique and (e) Angola in the financial year 2009-10; and if he will make a statement. 
Alistair Burt: In the financial year 2009-10 our British embassies and high commissions in the countries listed as follows incurred the following expenditure for hospitality:
|£||Percentage of post expenditure|
This expenditure was spent on a wide range of activities designed to establish and cultivate contacts and included meetings and events hosted for political and business delegations (including those in support of UK Trade and Industry) abroad, to promote and defend wider British interests. All expenditure on official hospitality is incurred in accordance with the principles of Managing Public Money and the Treasury handbook on Regularity, Propriety and Value for Money.
Mr Douglas Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many meetings Ministers in his Department have had with hon. Members on the European Union Bill. 
Mr Hague: Ministers have met or otherwise engaged with a number of hon. Members from all political parties, on a range of issues relating to the EU Bill both prior to introduction and during Parliament's consideration of the Bill. This is consistent with the normal course of business, and as the Bill proceeds through Parliament, Ministers will continue to engage with hon. Members in this way.
Stephen Phillips: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps his Department is taking to facilitate the safety of UK nationals in (a) Tunisia, (b) Egypt, (c) Jordan and (d) Yemen. 
Alistair Burt: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) produces travel advice for all countries which is kept under constant review. This includes information for British nationals on travel safety and avoiding problem situations. FCO travel advice is available on the FCO website as well as the FCO British Abroad Facebook and Twitter sites. The FCO has a strong relationship with around 400 travel industry partners as part of the ongoing Know Before You Go campaign to help British nationals stay safe and healthy abroad.
During the recent crisis in Tunisia, in response to the deteriorating situation, the FCO changed the travel advice on 13 January 2011 to advise against all but essential travel to Tunisia. The FCO worked closely with travel industry partners to enable British nationals wanting to leave the country in line with our travel advice to do so safely. The advice against all but essential travel to Tunisia was removed on 4 February 2011, in line with an improving security situation on the ground. In response to the unrest in Egypt, the FCO advises against all but essential travel to Cairo, Alexandria, Suez and Luxor. In addition, the FCO organised two government-funded charter flights for British nationals wanting to leave Cairo, on 3 and 5 February 2011. The FCO sent additional staff to both Tunisia and Egypt to reinforce our embassies on the ground. We continue to monitor the situation in Jordan and Yemen. There are currently no travel restrictions in place in Jordan. We currently advise against all but essential travel to Yemen, and against all travel to the Governorate of Sa'ada.
Lady Hermon: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assistance he has provided to Sudan following the recent referendum in that country. 
Alistair Burt: We are committed to providing long term support to the people of north and south Sudan. We are providing significant humanitarian and development funding this year to improve governance, address insecurity and provide basic services. The Government are currently conducting a review of all our bilateral and multilateral aid, including our humanitarian emergency response.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many times the then Foreign Secretary led trade delegations to (a) Brazil, (b) Russia, (c) India and (d) China between May 2005 and May 2010. 
Alistair Burt: The then Foreign Secretary, the right hon. Member for Derby South (Margaret Beckett), visited China in May 2007 accompanied by a trade delegation.
There were no Foreign Secretary-led trade delegations to Brazil, Russia or India between May 2005 and May 2010.
Mr Douglas Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he first received reports of unrest in Tunisia. 
Mr Hague: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office Minister responsible for North Africa and I receive regular reports from both our embassies in the region and officials here in London. In the case of Tunisia, our embassy in Tunis reported in December 2010 on the political developments that formed the backdrop to the unrest and thereafter provided regular updates as the unrest escalated.
Chris Ruane: To ask the Prime Minister what assessment he has made of the role of Sure Start centres in developing the big society. 
The Prime Minister: The Government have ensured that there is enough money in the system to maintain the network of Sure Start children's centres.
The Government are working with local authorities to enable voluntary and community sector organisations with a track record of supporting families to become more involved with running and delivering services within children's centres.
The Localism Bill is introducing a right for local organisations and local authority employees to challenge local authorities to contract out services. Where services are contracted out, community groups, including parents and other local people, can apply to run children's centres, or services within centres, themselves.
John Healey: To ask the Prime Minister what the attendance list was for the 10 Downing street event for GP pathfinders held on 26 January 2011; and with which organisations each attendee is affiliated. 
The Prime Minister: Information on official and charity receptions held at 10 Downing street is published by means of an annual list as soon as it is ready at the end of the financial year.
Kate Green: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the (a) total salary cost and (b) average salary is of staff employed on fixed-term contracts in his Department. 
Justine Greening: There are currently 76 staff employed on fixed-term contracts in the Treasury. The total of the basic salaries of those staff is £2,684,506, an average of £35,322 per fixed-term employee.
Priti Patel: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many EU directives are pending transposition into domestic legislation by his Department; and what estimate he has made of the cost of each such transposition. 
Mr Hoban: The EU Directives pending transposition into domestic legislation as of 14 January 2011 on which HM Treasury officials were engaged are set out in the following table. Estimates made by this Department of the gross transitional cost to the UK of their transposition (i.e. including costs likely to be incurred by private industry) are shown. No separate estimates of HM Treasury's administrative costs have been made.
These estimates do not take account of any benefits that might accrue to the UK.
|Title of legislation||Estimated costs|
Transposition has been partially completed; the estimated cost to the UK of implementation of the remaining parts is nil/marginal.
Directive 2010/78/EU amending Directives 98/26/EC, 2002/87/EC, 2003/6/EC, 2003/41/EC, 2003/71/EC, 2004/39/EC, 2004/109/EC, 2005/60/EC, 2006/48/EC, 2006/49/EC and 2009/65/EC in respect of the powers of the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority), the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority) and the European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority)
The estimated cost to the UK is nil/marginal (the only anticipated costs will be HM Treasury and Financial Services Authority staff costs).
European Directive 2010/73/EU (amendments to EU Prospectus Directive)
At pre-consultation stage: no estimate has yet been made of the total cost of implementation of the Amending Directive.
Directive 2009/65/EC Recast Undertakings for Collective Investments in Transferable Securities (UCITS IV) Directive 2009
Directive 2009/128/EC on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of insurance and reinsurance (Solvency II)
Implementing measures are not yet agreed and so no estimate is currently available.
Mr Carswell: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has assessed the merits of allowing county and metropolitan councils to collect and retain fuel duty locally; and if he will make a statement. 
Justine Greening: Fuel duty is collected directly from fuel producers and therefore does not distinguish between different fuel consumers or geographic areas. The Chancellor keeps all taxes under review.
Paul Farrelly: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what meetings in an official capacity (a) he (b) Ministers and (c) officials in his Department have had with (i) Rupert Murdoch, (ii) James Murdoch, (iii) Rebekah Wade, (iv) individuals representing News International, (v) individuals representing News Corporation and (vi) individuals representing BSkyB since 4 November 2010. 
Justine Greening: Treasury Ministers and officials have meetings with a wide range of organisations and individuals in the public and private sectors as part of the process of policy development and implementation.
The Treasury publishes a list of ministerial meetings with external organisations, available at:
Stephen Barclay: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what guidance his Department issues to (a) Ofcom and (b) other arm's length bodies on ensuring that their accounting practices are in line with those required of (i) Government departments and (ii) the National Audit Office. 
Danny Alexander [holding answer 14 February 2011]: Ofcom is a public corporation. The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills and the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport issue an Accounts Direction (to date administered by BIS, but which now passes to DCMS) that determines the accounting practice to be followed. As a Public Corporation, Ofcom accounts under the Companies Act and follows International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in line with the Government sector.
Arm's length bodies such as NDPBs, executive agencies and trading funds (along with Government Departments) follow the Government Financial Manual (FReM). Accounts Directions for NDPBs are issued by their Secretary of State in line with their legislation, normally with the agreement of the Treasury. HM Treasury issues the Accounts Directions for Departments and agencies (under the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000) and trading funds (under The Government Trading Funds Act 1973).
The NAO carry out their audits based on the requirements of the Accounts Directions.
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to the answer of 17 January 2011, Official Report, column 578W, on tax collection: debts, for what reason HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has published in the Official Journal of the European Community an invitation to tender for debt collection services which stipulates that during the lifetime of the agreement clients may wish to expand on core services and use supplementary services to ensure that debt recovery is maximised; and if he will assess the implications of this notice for HMRC policy on referring cases to private sector debt collection agencies for door-to-door visits. 
Mr Gauke: The advertisement to which the hon. Member refers relates to a procurement being conducted under the EU Open procedure in respect of a cross government framework contract and was published in the OJEU on 28 January 2011. This can be viewed at:
As the advertisement makes clear the intention is to procure, through a single framework contract, a comprehensive range of debt collection agency services that would then be available to HMRC, other Government Departments and public bodies to draw upon should the need arise.
The current procurement exercise does not alter the position with regard to door-to-door visits by HMRC staff that I set out in my answer of 17 January 2011, Official Report, column 578W.
Jim Fitzpatrick: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what information his Department holds for benchmarking purposes on aviation taxation regimes in (a) EU member states and (b) G20 countries; and if he will make a statement. 
Justine Greening: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Central Suffolk and North Ipswich (Dr Poulter) on 22 November 2010, Official Report, column 83W.
Mr Meacher: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will estimate the likely yield to the Exchequer of a tax on financial trades (a) internationally and (b) within the UK alone for clearing house automated payments system transactions at a rate of (i) 1 per cent., (ii) 0.1 per cent., (iii) 0.01 per cent. and (iv) 0.001 per cent. 
Mr Hoban: I refer the right hon. Member to the answer I gave on 16 September 2010, Official Report, column 1254W, to the hon. Member for West Suffolk (Matthew Hancock).
Karen Lumley: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether EU member states may operate differential value added tax rates on the sale of alcohol through the on trade and the off trade. 
Mr Gauke: Under the principal VAT directive, member states are only permitted to apply one standard rate of value added tax which must not be less than 15%.
Member states may also apply two reduced rates of value added tax, but they are not permitted to apply a reduced rate to alcoholic beverages.
Philip Davies: To ask the Leader of the House how much his Department spent on carbon offsetting in each of the last three years; and to which companies payments for carbon offsetting were made in each such year. 
Sir George Young: The Office of the Leader of the House of Commons is an integral part of the Cabinet Office.
I refer my hon. Friend to the answer given today by the Minister of State, Department of Energy and Climate Change, my hon. Friend the Member for Bexhill and Battle (Gregory Barker).
12. Julie Hilling: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps his Department is taking to promote fair trade in developing countries. 
Mr O'Brien: The Department for International Development is committed to the relief of poverty, and one of the most cost effective means is to promote open markets through a fair and strong multilateral trading system. DFID's support to fair and ethical trade aims to double the number of Fairtrade-certified producers to 2.2 million and improve working conditions in global supply chains.
14. Lilian Greenwood: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps his Department is taking to ensure that development aid contributes to poverty reduction in the developing world. 
Mr Duncan: DFID is highly regarded as a world leader in international development. Our focus on poverty reduction is designed to make a serious impact on attaining the Millennium Development Goals. The Bilateral and Multilateral Aid Reviews focus rigorously on securing value for money and transparency in all that we do.
15. Mrs Riordan: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps his Department is taking to assist African nations in meeting world poverty relief targets by 2015. 
Mr O'Brien: DFID is helping African nations to achieve the 2015 poverty relief targets through results-driven cost-effective investments to create wealth, strengthen governance and security, save and improve the lives of women and girls, and tackle climate change. We are committed to working transparently, and maximising value for money and impact.
Ms Harman: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what recent assessment he has made of the humanitarian situation of children and young people in (a) Sudan, (b) Uganda, (c) the Democratic Republic of Congo and (d) the Central African Republic; and what steps he is taking to support such children and young people. 
Mr Andrew Mitchell:
In Sudan one in 10 children die before the age of five, net enrolment in primary education is around 54% and Southern Sudan alone has over one million children out of school. In Uganda, children and young people have lost opportunities for education as a result of two decades of conflict, and now risk being unable to access the services they need because of a very high rate of population growth. In the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) one in five children die before their fifth birthday and more than four million
children are out of school. The Central African Republic (CAR) has been affected by civil war for a number of years. The UN estimates that 838,000 children need humanitarian assistance and one in 10 children suffers from acute malnutrition.
Investing in children and young people is of critical importance for a country's future development. DFID is currently reviewing its aid programme to ensure UK aid represents value for money for the UK taxpayer, while bringing real benefits to the world's poor and accelerating progress towards the Millennium Development Goals. The conclusions of the Bilateral Aid Review (BAR), Multilateral Aid Reviews (MAR) as well as the Humanitarian and Emergency Response Review (HERR) will determine our response to the challenges faced by children and young people in these countries. Conclusion of the BAR and MAR will be announced in the coming weeks, while the HERR will report by the end of March.
Pauline Latham: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what recent steps his Department has taken to support the post-conflict reconstruction process in Burundi; and what support he has provided for returning reintegrated refugees in that country. 
Mr O'Brien: In the last four years, the Department for International Development (DFID) has provided £5.8 million for post-conflict reconstruction and support for returning refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Burundi. UK support has enabled the refurbishment and construction of 143 schools and the repair of more than 13,000 pieces of school equipment. This has benefitted 35,000 students, of whom over 4,000 are returning refugees, and 850 teachers. 170,000 returning refugees have been successfully reintegrated and one million IDPs were provided with better access to basic health care and rural and urban water facilities.
With less than 50,000 refugees now remaining outside Burundi, DFID's focus has moved from providing humanitarian and post-conflict reconstruction support, to increasing the Government of Burundi's ability to deliver better health and education services.
DFID's future support to Burundi and the East Africa Community, of which Burundi is a member, will be announced upon the conclusion of the bilateral aid review in the coming weeks.
Stephen Phillips: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps he is taking to ensure that development assistance provided by the European Union under the Cotonou Agreement is linked to good governance within the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States countries. 
Mr O'Brien: The Cotonou agreement, which governs relations between the EU and the 79 African, Caribbean and the Pacific countries (ACP), is based on 'good governance' and the fundamental principles of democracy, rule of law and human rights. The violation of any of these principles can lead to a suspension of aid.
The agreement has recently been revised and sets out a clearer process for evoking the final imposition of article 96 measures, which apply when fundamental principles are breached. The UK continues to work with other member states and the European Commission to look at how to strengthen the implementation of the relevant articles.
The European Development Fund (EDF) has a governance incentive mechanism built into its aid programmes to ACP countries, through which it provides additional funding for commitments to deliver governance reforms.
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much his Department spent on carbon offsetting in each of the last three years; and to which companies payments for carbon offsetting were made in each such year. 
Mr Duncan: The Department for International Development (DFID) spent the following sums on carbon offsetting in each of the last three years:
During 2007-08 and 2008-09, the Government Carbon Offsetting Scheme was administered by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the sums were therefore transferred directly to them. In 2009-10 the payment was made to EDF Trading Ltd.
Nick de Bois: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office how many births there were at (a) Chase Farm Hospital, Enfield, (b) North Middlesex Hospital, Enfield and (c) Barnet Hospital in each of the last five years. 
Mr Hurd: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the authority to reply.
Letter from Stephen Penneck, dated February 2011:
As Director General for the Office for National Statistics, I have been asked to reply to your recent question asking how many births there were at (a) Chase Farm Hospital, Enfield, (b) North Middlesex Hospital, Enfield and (c) Barnet Hospital in each of the last five years. 
Figures for live births by hospital have been compiled from birth registration data. Information on place of birth is provided by the informant at registration rather than by the hospitals themselves.
|Live births occurring in selected hospitals, 2005 to 2009|
Lisa Nandy: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office whether his Department provides guidance to departments on data collection on the pay of sub-contracted staff. 
Mr Maude: The Government do not require Departments to collect data on the pay of sub-contracted staff, so no guidance has been issued.
All companies, including those acting as contractors or sub-contractors to Government, are required to comply with national minimum wage legislation.
Chris Ruane: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office how many and what proportion of jobs created in 2010 were ( a) full-time and (b) part-time. 
Mr Hurd: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the authority to reply.
Letter from Stephen Penneck, dated February 2011:
As Director General for the Office for National Statistics, I have been asked to reply to your Parliamentary Question asking for the number of part-time and full-time jobs created in 2010 (40630).
The requested information is not available. However estimates for the number of people in full-time and part-time employment are available from the Labour Force Survey. In the three months to November 2010 the number of people in full-time employment was 21,159,000, down 43,000 on the year. In the three months to November 2010 the number of people in part-time employment was 7,930,000, up 227,000 on the year. These estimates are seasonally adjusted.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|